UK coalition to downgrade scientific advice

Update: The Government today announced Adrian Smith as the new director general for knowledge and innovation at the department for business, innovation and skills. The move was welcomed by Imran Khan, director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering, and by Chi Onwurah, shadow minister. However, Onwurah added: "We are worried what the process revealed about ministers' instincts - they clearly did not understand the reasons why science policy has been led by a senior scientist for decades."

Chi Onwurah MP, shadow minister for Business, Innovation and Skills

The government has confirmed that the position of director general of science and research has been abolished, and the role of science research downgraded within the organisation.

When my party was in government, we respected the long standing arrangement where the senior official responsible for science was recruited from among those of high standing in the science community.

The secretary of state has failed to give any assurance that this approach - essential to maintaining the confidence of the science community in government policy - will be continued. The current chief scientist has called this "extremely regrettable", while a predecessor described it as "stupid, ignorant and politically foolish".

My colleague, the shadow secretary of state for business, innovation and skills
(BIS), John Denham, has written to the secretary of state for BIS to
express his surprise and concern at the loss of such an important role.
He has also asked for clarification of the implications for the Haldane
Principle, which basically states it is for scientists to decide how
science funding is best spent.

The decision of the government not to consult with the scientific
community demonstrates that its avowed support for science has little
substance. Without support for science and the industries of the
future, the government cannot have a credible strategy for growth.

I voted for Ms Onwurah as the LP candidate for Newcastle upon Tyne Central, and must admit to being a trifle disappointed over the short memory exhibited here. We haven't forgotten Prof David Nutt so quickly y'know.

Why don't we just grow up and face facts? No politician is going to let some idea of 'evidence based government' - designed only to get them into power - override their interests. You need a statesman (sorry - not my sexist term) for that.

JaneDerbyshire
on November 19, 2010 6:44 PM

Earlier comments miss the point. The Prof Nutt sacking was a bad decision, in my opininlon, but not typical of Labour's approach to science
And anyway, how does that make the current decision anything but a bad move?
Is no Labour MP allowed to comment on anything ever again because of some bad decision by a colleague? Who else will oppose bad Govt decisions??

Kevin Breslin
on December 9, 2010 7:58 PM

The Tories are a bunch Luddites who worry only about their own money, the only tech we'll see is the inevitable technocracy that ROI already has intervening when the country goes into double dip recession.

Mads Granlie
on December 13, 2010 11:26 AM

You should consider yourself pretty lucky in the UK to have scientists in a position to decide how to fund science. In Denmark the science funding is decided by a ministry and minister that have no natural sciences backgrounds. furthermore we have a single!!!! engineer in the parliament, and no scientifically educated people in the parliament.

TheLibrarianApe
on December 18, 2010 11:45 AM

Not sure what point fellow commenters are trying to make.

Surely that the Government is moving towards a 'fact free' form of decision making is a point of substantial concern, both to scientists and the general public.

Given the Government's approach to the Audit Commission, and gathering of statistics, of course we should worry about the downgrading of scientific advice. The scientific community may be next target for a savaging.

We have an administration that does not wish evidence to get in the way of any decisions that they wish to make: presumably that includes not only employment or poverty statistics, but could easily include nuclear policy, climate change and medicine.